Re: Internationalised/Localised postal code and country elements
Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.provreg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 04:11:24PM +0000, Gavin Brown wrote: > > And what do you mean by "numeric"? Remember that not all digits are > > the ones familiar to those with a US keyboard. > > I mean the range of code points from U+0030 to U+0039 inclusive. That's what I figured. The problem is, not everyone writes their numbers that way, and many people who have these other ways to denote the "same digits" think that they're equivalent. In India, I have observed signs with fairly free intermixing of what I think were Devanagari digits and digits I recognized as mine. Fun fact: using Devanagari, this is a seven: ७. Better, ५ is a five. Six is ६. I have been informed more than once that spreadsheets in the Arabic world store Arabic-digit input as our familiar digits, and then translate back at presentation time. This is so that character encoding can't mess up arithmetic operations. So, if someone is entering a localized version of an address and they get to the post code field, are we confident that they're not going to use localized digits, even if they use ASCII letters? (None of this is to denigrate your suggestion, which I think is reasonable. I just want us to understand what rule we're making and what the consequences will be, for whom.) Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan [email protected] _______________________________________________ provreg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg